- From: Warner ten Kate <tenkate@natlab.research.philips.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 14:57:39 +0100
- To: Gomer Thomas <gomer@lgerca.com>
- Cc: www-tv <www-tv@w3.org>
Gomer Thomas wrote: > Thanks. Seems to me we have the same understanding in what a URI and what a URL is. I also think we agree that the requirements improve by rewording URL into URI. The objective to locate the identified resource remains. > In section 1.2 it states "The term 'Uniform Resource Locator' (URL) refers to the > subset of URI that identify resources via a representation of their primary > access mechanism ..." I understand that, that other than 'primary' mechanisms are excluded, which is something I don't want to exclude a-priori in our requirements. (I am not saying we should not use URLs.) > Further down it mentions that "... both DNS and HTTP are > typically used to access an 'http' URL's resource ..." This implies to me that > the term URL includes the usual form we find in HTML pages, based on an Internet > domain name. Agree, that 'form we find in HTML pages' comforms the URL syntax and semantics. > As you probably know, this does not necessarily resolve to a unique > location, since a DNS server may return multiple IP addresses for a single > Internet domain name. Sometimes these refer to multiple network interfaces on the > same host, but sometimes they refer to separate hosts, for example in the case of > mirrored servers. > Sorry, I didn't know. I knew RDS (Resolver Discovery Service) was doing that, using DNS [RFC 2168]. From the 2168-Abstract: "Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) are the foundation of the World Wide Web, and are a vital Internet technology. However, they have proven to be brittle in practice. The basic problem is that URLs typically identify a particular path to a file on a particular host. There is no graceful way of changing the path or host once the URL has been assigned. Neither is there a graceful way of replicating the resource located by the URL to achieve better network utilization and/or fault tolerance. Uniform Resource Names (URNs) have been hypothesized as a adjunct to URLs that would overcome such problems. URNs and URLs are both instances of a broader class of identifiers known as Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)." I thought DNS provides you with a host-name to IP-address mapping (and v.v.); a mirror is using another host-name. Isn't http providing a re-direction service ? Anyhow, this name vs. location (IP-address) in the host-part of the URL provides the type of extra abstraction I am after with my URL2URI substitution for the complete URI/L. > Further down it in section 1.2 it states "A URN differs from a URL in that it's > [sic] primary purpose is persistent labeling of a resource with an identifier." That's why to me it is an interesting candidate for our type of problem. > Thus, there seems to be no intent that a URN (which is a subset of URI) provide > any assistance whatsoever in locating the resource. There are schemes how to resolve a URN into a URL, eg.. the RFC 2168. > > Having said all that, I am in complete agreement with your intent that we should > be allowed "to look for solutions which enable a single resource to be retrieved > from multiple locations." I had never intended to exclude this possibility, and > in fact the solutions which I have been considering do allow it. I cheerfully > accept any changes to the wording of the requirements which make that more clear. Thanks. Btw. is somebody willing to edit and document a requirements list ? (you ?, Philipp?) > > I think the solution to the problem of multiple interlinked documents getting > moved to local storage lies in the use of relative URLs, as you suggest, together > with some mechanism to adjust the base URL appropriately. > > The solutions I have been thinking of handle the problem of rescheduled events. I > will try to write up my ideas in this area as soon as I get a couple of other > brush fires out of the way -- and as soon as we converge on the requirements > (which seems to be very close to happening). > Thanks again, I am looking forward to your proposals, Warner. -- Philips Research Labs. WY21 ++ New Media Systems & Applications Prof. Holstlaan 4 ++ 5656 AA Eindhoven ++ The Netherlands Phone: +31 4027 44830 Fax: +31 4027 44648 tenkate@natlab.research.philips.com
Received on Wednesday, 4 November 1998 08:59:03 UTC